Iraqi PM says US should leave as soon as possible - Page 6

section eight · 07-20-08, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Summerwind

And then there's this: Maliki's Praise for Obama: Iraqi Leader Stirs up US Campaign - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News

From Spiegel:

A Baghdad government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said in a statement that SPIEGEL had "misunderstood and mistranslated" the Iraqi prime minister, but didn't point to where the misunderstanding or mistranslation might have occurred. Al-Dabbagh said Maliki's comments "should not be understood as support to any US presidential candidates." The statement was sent out by the press desk of the US-led Multinational Force in Iraq.

A number of media outlets likewise professed to being confused by the statement from Maliki's office. The New York Times pointed out that al-Dabbagh's statement "did not address a specific error." CBS likewise expressed disbelief pointing out that Maliki mentions a timeframe for withdrawal three times in the interview and then asks, "how likely is it that SPIEGEL mistranslated three separate comments? Matthew Yglesias, a blogger for the Atlantic Monthly, was astonished by "how little effort was made" to make the Baghdad denial convincing. And the influential blog IraqSlogger also pointed out the lack of specifics in the government statement.<snip>

So it looks like there is some question about your article. I also found somewhere that CentCom released al-Dabbagh's statement which seems kind of funky to me. I'll see if I can find a link to that, though it was a liberal source, so I'm sure you won't accept it.

Oh, here is a link to the actual interview. SPIEGEL Interview with Iraq Leader Nouri al-Maliki: 'The Tenure of Coalition Troops in Iraq Should Be Limited' - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News

A) So what if he wasn't misquoted, that just means that he's flip flopping and now doesn't support a timetable, Obama supporters should understand that as he has done the exact same thing first deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal, then flip flopping, then deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal again.

B) Again there has not been any bill passed into law calling for a U.S. withdrawal.

Summerwind · 07-20-08, 01:48 PM

Okay here is one: Talking Points Memo | Satire Eight Paces Up on Reality

<snip>Another interesting detail, noted by the Times. al-Dabbagh's statement was released by CentCom. I do not know how often Iraqi government statements are released by CentCom.<snip>

here's another: Daily Kos: UPDATE: Der Spiegel responds to CentCom and stands by the story

There are dozens more but they all reference "noted by the Times."

Summerwind · 07-20-08, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by section eight

A) So what if he wasn't misquoted, that just means that he's flip flopping and now doesn't support a timetable, Obama supporters should understand that as he has done the exact same thing first deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal, then flip flopping, then deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal again.

B) Again there has not been any bill passed into law calling for a U.S. withdrawal.

It may not matter to you, but it sure indicates an issue to many of us. Each to his own.

What is your hang up with bills? Do you have any evidence that this isn't being discussed and worked on by/with their Congress/Parliament?

section eight · 07-20-08, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Summerwind

Okay here is one: Talking Points Memo | Satire Eight Paces Up on Reality

<snip>Another interesting detail, noted by the Times. al-Dabbagh's statement was released by CentCom. I do not know how often Iraqi government statements are released by CentCom.<snip>

here's another: Daily Kos: UPDATE: Der Spiegel responds to CentCom and stands by the story

There are dozens more but they all reference "noted by the Times."

A) So what if he wasn't misquoted, that just means that he's flip flopping and now doesn't support a timetable, Obama supporters should understand that as he has done the exact same thing first deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal, then flip flopping, then deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal again.

B) Again there has not been any bill passed into law calling for a U.S. withdrawal.

Summerwind · 07-20-08, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by section eight

A) So what if he wasn't misquoted, that just means that he's flip flopping and now doesn't support a timetable, Obama supporters should understand that as he has done the exact same thing first deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal, then flip flopping, then deciding he wanted an immediate withdrawal again.

B) Again there has not been any bill passed into law calling for a U.S. withdrawal.

You mischaractize his stance by using the words "immediate withdrawal," he has said immediate plans for withdrawal, not immediate withdrawal; he has said working with the commanders on the ground and the Iraqi govt to be as careful exiting as we were careless entering, not immediate withdrawal; he has said he needed more information that he didn't currently have to refine any plans, not immediate withdrawal.

You keep throwing that strawman around, it isn't working.

cascadian · 07-20-08, 02:50 PM

Even allowing for mistranslation and context, Maliki seems to favor sooner rather than later. Obviously he has to hedge his bets right now for either candidate, and trying to influence an election is a major diplomatic no-no.

However, I feel like I have a sense that sooner is more politically viable for him than later. While I have always felt a military surge wouldn't solve Iraq's long-term problems, I think we should take advantage of this window of confidence. Sooner or later, they will have to stand on their own. If we wait too long after the surge we will probably be farther away from leaving Iraq than ever.

TacticalEvilDan · 07-20-08, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by section eight

Maliki is not the dictator of Iraq, the Iraqi parliament must pass into law a bill calling for a timetable or an immediate withdrawal that's how it works in a democracy.

Bush isn't (yet) the dictator of the United States, and yet if the positions were reversed and Bush was saying he wanted Iraqi forces to leave US soil, his word would be taken very seriously regardless of the fact that he'd need a legislative measure to sign in order for it to become law.

hrdman2luv · 07-20-08, 05:45 PM

You guys can pick yours/ and the prime ministers and everyone elses words apart. But the facts are that the Iraqi's are tired of the USA government and it's soldiers dominating their country and their government. They want us out. And we should leave with enough oil, (owned by the US government, and put into our own reserves to be opened by bush) to pay for all our efforts in Iraq.

section eight · 07-21-08, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hrdman2luv

You guys can pick yours/ and the prime ministers and everyone elses words apart. But the facts are that the Iraqi's are tired of the USA government and it's soldiers dominating their country and their government. They want us out.

Do you understand the concept of representative versus direct democracy? If the Iraqi people truly want the U.S. out of Iraq then they need to elect candidates running on that platform then a bill must be signed into law.

Quote:

And we should leave with enough oil, (owned by the US government, and put into our own reserves to be opened by bush) to pay for all our efforts in Iraq.

The Iraqi oil is the property of the Iraqi people as codified under their Constitution.

section eight · 07-21-08, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan

Bush isn't (yet) the dictator of the United States, and yet if the positions were reversed and Bush was saying he wanted Iraqi forces to leave US soil, his word would be taken very seriously regardless of the fact that he'd need a legislative measure to sign in order for it to become law.

I'm not saying that his words shouldn't be taken seriously, however, Maliki can not rule by decree and neither can Bush, that power is reserved for tyrants like Chavez.

And btw what are you people going to do when you don't have the strawman of Bush to knock down anymore? "Yet" indeed.